- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M WRIT PETITION NO. 12187 OF 2020 (L-KSRTC) BETWEEN: BENGALURU MOTROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION (BMTC), K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560027. BY ITS CHIEF TRAFFIC MANAGER REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. RENUKA H.R., ADVOCATE) AND: C.SESHAIAH, S/O. CHENNAIAH, ADULT C/O. KRISHNAPPA NO.11, OPP. TO KAVIKA FACTORY, BYATARAYANAPURA, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU -560026. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.M.LOKESH, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Smt.Renuka H.R., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.B.M.Lokesh, counsel for the respondent, appeared in person. 2. The petition averments are as follows: The respondent was appointed as a driver in the establishment of the corporation and was placed on probation for two years. He submitted a transfer certificate bearing T.C.No.73/78-79 issued by the Government Kannada Practising Middle School, Mysore. The said certificate was sent for verification; the security officer submitted a report stating that the certificate is a fake. The articles of charge were issued alleging that he had secured employment by the production of a fake certificate. The respondent submitted his reply, denied the charges. The enquiry officer submitted the findings holding that the charge levelled against the respondent is proved. He was issued a second showcase notice. Taking note of the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 material evidence on record, the punishment order was passed on 21.06.2004, and was dismissed from service. 3. The respondent questioned the order of dismissal by raising a dispute in I.D.No.72/2006 before the Labor Court, Bengaluru. The Labor Court held that the domestic enquiry conducted by the Corporation was not fair and proper. The parties led evidence. The Labor Court vide award dated. 03.07.2013 held that the charges are not proved and directed reinstatement of the workman with continuity of service and with all consequential benefits and with 25% of the back wages. 4. The Corporation questioned the award of the Labor Court in Writ petition No.1892 of 2014. This court vide order dated 09.01.2017 set aside the award of the Labour Court, and the matter was remanded to the Labour Court with a direction to dispose of the case afresh. 5. After remand, the Corporation filed two applications, one for the appointment of a commissioner and the other for the issue of summons. The Labor Court rejected - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 both the applications and passed the award dated 21.04.2018,directing the Corporation to reinstate the respondent with 25% of the back wages. Under these circumstances, the corporation has filed the present writ petition on several grounds as set out in the memorandum of writ petition. 6. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the writ papers with care. 7. The following points would arise for consideration: (i) Whether the Labor Court is justified in rejecting the applications; and (ii) Does the award of the Labor Court require interference? 8. The facts are sufficiently said, and they do not require reiteration. The issue falls within a narrow compass and relates to the act of securing employment by furnishing a fake certificate. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 9. The respondent was appointed as a driver, and he submitted a transfer certificate bearing T.C.No.73/78-79. Upon verification, the certificate was found to be fraudulent, i.e., he had furnished a fake and bogus transfer certificate. The Corporation furnished the true copy of the transfer certificate before the Labor Court and the same was marked as Ex.M14. In Ex M14, the transfer certificate number is shown as 73/78- 79 and the admission number as 35/73-74. This Court had directed AGA to secure the records, and the government advocate has furnished true copies of the transfer certificate and the admission register. I have perused the same with care. A copy of the Transfer Certificate furnished by the Government Advocate reflects that Transfer Certificate No.73/78-79 relates to one M.Shivanna, son of Maganna. The Admission Number is shown as No.91/75-76. The admission No.35/73-74 relates to one D.Krishna, S/o Doddaiah. It does not relate to the respondent. 10. It is pivotal to note that after remand, the Corporation examined Smt.Aruna, the Headmistress of the Government Practising Kannada Middle School, Nazarabad, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 Mysore. She has stated,as per the school register, that the T.C. No. 73/78-79 relates to one Mr Shivanna, Son of M. Maganna, and the admission number is shown as 91/75-76. The date of issue of the T C is shown as 01.06.1978. She has also stated that the admission No. 35/73-74 relates to D. Krishna, son of Doddaiah. Hence, it can be safely concluded that the documents furnished by the government align with the evidence of the headmistress. In other words, the documents furnished by the government are consistent with the headmistress's evidence. Therefore, I conclude that the Corporation discharged its obligation by examining the Headmistress of the school. All necessary oral and documentary evidence is already on record, allowing for a proper decision. Hence, the matter does not require a remand. The decision of the Labor Court to reject the applications was erroneous; hence, the Labor Court's rejection of the applications was a material error, and they are liable to be set aside. 11. The Labour Court placed reliance on certain orders that were passed in respect of other workmen to conclude that the corporation had imposed a minor punishment on the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 similarly situated workmen and thus the punishment in respect of the present workman is discriminatory in nature. This is erroneous. The Labour Court has failed to notice that there cannot be a similar yardstick in all cases of disciplinary matters. Each case differs as the misconduct also varies from case to case. It is perhaps well to observe that each case depends on the gravity of the misconduct coupled with the history of the worker. 12. Based on the material evidence, it is clear that the workmen used a fake certificate to secure employment. Hence, such an employee does not deserve any sympathy, much less misplaced sympathy. 13. For the reasons stated above, the orders dated 16.03.2018 and 06.04.2018 on interlocutory applications are set aside. Consequently, the award dated 21.04.2018 passed by the Labor Court in ID No.72/2006 is quashed.The order of punishment is confirmed. 14. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50777 WP No. 12187 of 2020 Because of the disposal of the writ petition, the interim order granted by this court, if any, stands discharged and pending interlocutory applications, and interim directions, if are disposed of. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13